D&D 5E Greater Invis and Stealth checks, how do you rule it?

[Crimson Longinus]

Provided above.

And see also the section on awareness and surprise in thr start of the combat chapter.

Neither of those says that.

 

[Flamestrike]

Neither of those says that.

Unless one side is trying to be stealthy all sides to a combat notice the others at the start of the combat. (Awareness and surprise section).

And combatans automatically notice creatures that emerge from hiding during the combat. (Unseen attackers sidebar).

Unless you're already hidden before combat, youre noticed when it begins. If you want to hide in combat there is the Hide action. If you leave your hiding place in combat youre noticed automatically.

There are a billion threads on this topic here and on reddit and elsewhere. Go read them if you don't believe me.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Unless one side is trying to be stealthy all sides to a combat notice the others at the start of the combat. (Awareness and surprise section).

Being invisible is definitely being stealthy.

And combatans automatically notice creatures that emerge from hiding during the combat. (Unseen attackers sidebar).

Attacking 'gives away the location.' That location, not any other later location.

 

[Flamestrike]

Being invisible is definitely being stealthy.

it lets you Hide at will via the action and a Stealth check.

Its no different to any other total obscurement or full cover.

You still have to use the Hide action and beat your opponents perception score.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

it lets you Hide at will via the action and a Stealth check.

Its no different to any other total obscurement or full cover.

You still have to use the Hide action and beat your opponents perception score.

That relates to being surprised, not knowing the location. Noticing that enemies approach is not same than being able to pinpoint the exact location of said enemies. Also GM is of course perfectly within their rights to grant auto success in tasks due circumstances and being undetectable by vision is pretty good reason for granting such in that stealth check for that surprise too.

 

[Ovinomancer]

That relates to being surprised, not knowing the location. Noticing that enemies approach is not same that being able to pinpoint the exact location of said enemies. Also GM is of course perfectly within their rights to grant auto success in tasks due circumstances and being undetectable by vision is pretty good reason for granting such in that stealth check for that surprise too.

Yes, but it's bad for the game. It makes invisibility, already a powerful ability, more powerful for no real return. It makes combats with any invisible creature much more frustrating. And, it doesn't reward build choices, like investing in Stealth or the Rogue class because a 2nd level spell does all of that.

If you don't make invisibility an assumed hidden location, it's still hella good -- advantage on attacks you make, disad on incoming attacks, immunity to any spell that requires the caster to see the target, and ability to attempt to hide at will. That's awesomely good! It doesn't need auto-hidden as well.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Yes, but it's bad for the game. It makes invisibility, already a powerful ability, more powerful for no real return. It makes combats with any invisible creature much more frustrating. And, it doesn't reward build choices, like investing in Stealth or the Rogue class because a 2nd level spell does all of that.

If you don't make invisibility an assumed hidden location, it's still hella good -- advantage on attacks you make, disad on incoming attacks, immunity to any spell that requires the caster to see the target, and ability to attempt to hide at will. That's awesomely good! It doesn't need auto-hidden as well.

The rules should do what logically follows from the fiction. Possible balance issues are another matter entirely.

 

[Oofta]

Yes, but it's bad for the game. It makes invisibility, already a powerful ability, more powerful for no real return. It makes combats with any invisible creature much more frustrating. And, it doesn't reward build choices, like investing in Stealth or the Rogue class because a 2nd level spell does all of that.

If you don't make invisibility an assumed hidden location, it's still hella good -- advantage on attacks you make, disad on incoming attacks, immunity to any spell that requires the caster to see the target, and ability to attempt to hide at will. That's awesomely good! It doesn't need auto-hidden as well.

I don't think anyone is saying that invisibility means you are automatically hidden every time, just that the rules don't support the requirement to make a stealth check to always avoid detection. How easy or difficult it is to detect a creature that's invisible is going to vary by campaign, DM and situation.

I agree that greater invisibility can be incredibly powerful. It's why greater invisibility is concentration and a cloak of invisibility is a legendary item. Legendary items are meant to be a bit game breaking. Fortunately there are ways to counter invisibility built into the game such as faerie fire and see invisibility. Not to mention mundane options like a bag of powder.

 

[Ovinomancer]

The rules should do what logically follows from the fiction. Possible balance issues are another matter entirely.

The fiction could also follow what happens in the rules. I said this earlier, that if you start with a picture in your head of what happens before you look at the rules this is what most often causes problems. If you look at what the rules do first, then invent the fiction for that, there are fewer problems. Your response is an example of the former .

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The fiction could also follow what happens in the rules. I said this earlier, that if you start with a picture in your head of what happens before you look at the rules this is what most often causes problems. If you look at what the rules do first, then invent the fiction for that, there are fewer problems. Your response is an example of the former .

If you want to change invisibility spell to make people, say translucent instead of completely invisible then that's fine. And if you think the spell is too powerful, it would be good way to nerf it. But currently it makes people literally invisible, thus that is what is happening in the fiction.

I think this discussion is a tad bizarre. Like let's say that a fight commences and there is a tall wall in the area, completely blocking the line of sight to the other side of it. If there was a person standing behind this wall, would people still be debating whether creatures that cannot see that person could pinpoint their exact location?